DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 341 944 CG 024 041

AUTHOR Laasonen, RaimoTITLE Self-Identification of Personality in Social

Environment. Research Bulletin BO.INSTITUTION Helsinki Univ. (Finland). Dept. of Education.REPORT NO ISBN-951-45-5992-4; ISSN-0359-5749PUB DATE 91NOTE 25p.

PUB TYPE Reports - Research/Technical (143)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Decision Making; Foreign Countries; *Identification;

Interpersonal Competence; *Personality Traits; *SelfConcept; *Social Environment; *Systems Analysis

IDENTIFIERS *Finland

ABSTRACTThis paper presents a theoretical study conducted as

part of a larger research project concerning personality as aneducational phenomenon. In contrast to most approaches, which viewpersonality from the outside, this approach employs systems analysisto examine how individuals identify their personalities in varyingsubenvironments of a social environment. According to this approach,an individual is defined with structure, function, and dynamism;personality is assumed given. Self-identification is considered to bea binary decision process with acceptance-rejection behavioraccording to one's own personality. The social environment isdifferentiated into dyad, small group, collective, organization, andaggregate subgroups. It is assumed that tnere is variability ofrelations between the subenvironments and the identification ofpersonality. A hypothesis for dynamism is constructed: in th dyad,the smallest element of social environment that can function associal environment, the preferential behavior is perceived accordingto one's personality; in the small group, preferences becomeambivalent; in the collective, there is contagion of behavior; in theorganization, there is strong binary-decision making; and in theaggregate, no specific conditions of behavior are presumed. The paperestablishes the theoretical basis, examines the subject matter indetail, and makes a proposal for quantification and measurementoperations for an empirical Inquiry. It concludes with somediscussion about the connection of the study and education for thedevelopment of social skills. The structure measure, function anddynamism measures, and a background information measure in Finnishare appended. (Author/NB)

******************************************* ************** ****** ********

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

************************ ********** ****** ****** **** ****** ***************

(314 Department ofrall EducationRes

Cit

gris

4.

e ot t Aucat.rohal l4fseah h am, tmprovement

OU S DEPARTMENT OF r DUCATTON

E nor TIONAL RE SOURCE S INF ORMA IONCENTF P if R1(:1

Thh5 Ant ushrh1 hatt hero rpoht.ithh0 asIN. per son m tuivoettiatton

Cm)ortotnattrto tit

Mto. t IT&fluest hare bete., tr,ittle ti .rrytt,re1 pro OCtut 1.0P quality

University ofHelsinki

RESEARCH BULLETIN 80

Ralmo LeasonenSELF-IDENTIFICATION OF PERSONALITY

IN SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT

-Peuntier4 /tof up.rupos stated rn Mrs dor nMehl dip not naLessmtle twesenlOE RI posphon of Poke

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

,t...-

2 BEST COPY LtLETO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER IERIC)."

Department of Education, University of HelsinkiHead: Anna-Liisa Leino, Professor of Education (Swedish)

Bulevardi 18, SF-00120 Helsinki. Finland

RESEARCH BULLETIN 80

Raimo LaasonenSELF-IDENTIFICATION OF PERSONALITY

IN SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT

Helsinki 1991

3

ISBN 951-45-5992-4ISSN 0359-5749

Helsinki 1992Yliopistopaino

4

Universny of HelsinkiDepartment of Eckication

Research Bulletin 80. 1991

Raimo Laasonen

SELF-IDENTIFICATION OF PERSONALITY IN SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT

A hst ract

A preliminary theoretical study was conducted concerning theidentification of personality in social environment.The approach was the one

used in Systems Analysis.A human was defined with structure, function and

dynamism and personality was assumed giver.. Self-identification was

considered to be a binary decision process with acceptance-rejection behaviour

according to one's own personality. The social environment was differentiated

into dyad,small group,collective, organisation and aggregate.lt was assumedthat there was variability of relations between the subenvironments and the

identification of personality.A hypothesis for dynamism was constructed,

In addition i the theoretical examination, measures were developed for

the structure, function and dynamism as well as a questionnaire for background

information about people's experiences in the subenvimnments was compiled.

Lastly, there was some discussion about the connection of the study andeducating social skills.

Key words: system, structure, function. dynamics.binary decisionmaking, social skills, personality.

ISBN 951-45-5992-4

ISSN 0359-5749 Available from: Department of Education

University of Helsinki

Bulevardi 18

SF-00120 Helsinki

Finland

Mint. +358 0 1911Telefax +358 0 1918073

3

Acknowledgements

I would like express my warm thanks to Professor Erkki A. Niskanen

for his guidance in problematics and made it possible for me concentrate onfull-time research . I also want to thank Mr Vesa Niskanen, Docent and MrToivo Heikurinen. Ph.D., for illuminating discussions on the subject matter.

Author

4

Contents Page1. Introduction 5

2. Starting points 6

3. Self-identification of personality 9

4. Self-identification and social environment 10

5. Work hypothesis 12

6. Measuring self-identification of personality 13

6.1. Structure measure 14

6.2. Function and dynamism measure 14

6.3. Obtaining background information 15

7. Possible educational implications 16

Discussion

References

Appendix 1 Structure measure

Appendix 2 Function and dynamis:n measure

Appendix 3 Background information measure

7

5

1. Int roduct ion

The theoretical study is a part of a larger research project concerningpersonality as an educational phenomenon ( Niskanen 1990).The systemicframing of the study is based on my thesis( Laasonen 1991).The problem underscrutiny is derived from the two theoretical viewpoints. The objective of thestudy is to approach personality from new angle as usually is made. A commonapproach is to see personality from the outside to the inside. In this case theapproach is from the inside to the outside.The purpose is to examine howpersons identify their personalities in varying subenvirontnerns of a socialenvironmem.The reason for taking social environment into account is that ahuman is an open system with exchange relations to his or her environment.Onthe other hand.there is variety in the social environment nearly concerning itssubenvironments.The differentiation of social environment can he done inmany ways.The meta-approach which this paper is based on comes from theSystems Approach, not the çeneral Systems Approach, because there has notbeen enough discussion about the boundaries of general systems. However, theaim of the GSA-approach is to find a skeleton" which combines theconceptually divided world. Finding a skeleton" though is not veryenlightning and it hardly can provide information about living processes,Thisis why it is necessary to discuss the limits of general systems in order topromote theoretical development, It is difficult to discuss these issues in thetradition of the famous four blind men.

The structure of this paper is- as follows: first the theoretical basis willhe established, then the subject matter vvil! he examined in detail and finally a

proposal will he made for quantification and measure operations for anempirical inquiry.

2. Starting points

The meta-initial condition of the meta starting points is that everything

changes and modifies, perceived stable phenomena are dependent on theresolution level of time. On the other hand, the world is seen as an organised

monistic entity, which can he conceptually differentiated for various research

purposes.

The natural consequence of the monistic view is that a human can be

perceived as an organised whole.Although.we can differentiate between various

sides of a human conceptually. From a systems point of view a human can heseen as 11 a biological creature 2) a social creature 3) a culturalcreature.Usually, when behaviour is the issue we do not support the entity of

resolution levels. hut pay attention to those aspects which are essential forhehaviour. It is enough to verify that a human's basic needs are essential for the

first viewpoint, including basic affiliations which have been significant forsurvival in the course of evolution.h is rather easy to make a distinctionhetweer. the two first classifications hut is more complex is to classify the

social and cultural aspects realistically.

There is overlapping but that can be crossed conceptually.ln this context

the distinction between social and cultural is made according to output into

the environment. The cultural aspects lea.te a trace in the environment and the

social ones have no output into the environment.For instance, discussion does

not leave imprints on the environment, however written words do.Giving

exhaustive definitions for social and cultural would take a lifetime but here it

is sufficient to state that social refrs to relations between humans and cultural

includes the use of tools.

However, there are additional factors which are significant forbehaviour: people try to fulfil their desires and they create their goals. So we

can Say that people behave purposefully( Ackoff, Emery I972).The question of

consciousness will not he dealt with in this context because of the conscious

9

7

avoidance of the " ghost in the machine " way of thinking. Due to the

organised human there is no need to deny that personality is an organisedwhole.The defining of personality would take another lifetime and thuspersonality is assumed to be given. The crucial point of the study is how ahuman is able to identify his/her personality when in different kinds of social

subenvironments.ln other words, the question is about how a biologic-sociocultural system which tries to fulfil his/her desires and create objectives can

identify its personality in varying social conditions? By defining a human as a

system presumes that we say something about structure, function anddynamism. The structure can be defined as a set of relations between theaforementioned classification. Function can be defined as action in a certain

subenvironment. Dynamism means purposeful walks between differentsubenvironments as contrasted with random walks. Howeversin this contextrandom influences are not denied, yet people are seen to strive for purposeful

behav ior.

Little has been said about the differentiation ot the social environment.Naturally, there are many ways to divide the social environment intosubenvironments. Here it is based on the number of members and a kind of

looseness-tightness aspect. However, the differences are somewhat hazybetween the concepts used.The division is as follows: dyad, small group,collective, organization and aggregate.The pacing of bounds between theconcepts is not clear due to the haziness of the boundary conditions among the

concepts. Something which makes the matter more complicated is that the

concepts do not have clearly limited intensions, instead there are varying

intersections among the use of the concepts.The phenomenon in question can be

presented in pictorial form as helow.

1 0

8

"Organisation

Dya Collective41421. ,a1111111Mr

Figure 1 Purposeful Walks

Aggregate

411.01111ffillr

Dyad as a subenvironment is rather clear hut not necessarily simple.The

matter becomes complex with the small-group due to the lack of knowledge of

what is small. Of course we can limit the number of members of the smallgroup but that is too rigid.One criterium for a small group could be a coalition

free group. because then there would not be any subdivisions. Collectiveusually implies a looser but greater entity than a small group, and smallerentity than an organisation. Organiation, on the other hand, can include theformer social wholes and an aggregate can include the former totalities. Forinstance, an aggregate can be consist of many organisations.

In short, we have constructed a system starting from an all encompassing

viewpoint which assumes the world to be an organised whole like a human,

too. As a matter of fact, a human system has been constructed and its social

11

9

environment has been differentiated but nothing has been said about the

system's "journey" in the environment, simultaneously identifying its

personality.

3. Self-idtantification of personalit

Many approaches can be used for self-identification.They need not be the

ones applied in the behavioural sciences since most people do not become

involved in research.Thus these approaches comprehend personality in a

different way than researchers.This means that the base of identification also

deviates much from the one used in the behavioural sciences. An ordinary way

of seeing personality is that it has value loading. For instance, when people say

he /she is an "international" person it means that this is a remarkable person, a

personality.That is the viewpoint from the outside to the inside.What we do not

know is how the personality identifies itself, what are the cues, signs symbols.

events. processes or their eombinations which give a " touch" for personality.

That is the point from the inside to the outside.ln other words.the question is

about subjective slates which are unobservable to others, except whenexpressed in sonic way.

If we change the viewpoint and try to examine the issue from anindividual's viewpoint. then some things seem more probable than others.One

of the things is likely a question of suitability which means that self-identification can be a binary evuit. To put it simply a person decides which

behavioural modes and contents are suitable for him/herThus identification

takes place through Yes and No responses.ln this way personality is

identified with the pacing of bounds.The question does not follow with certain

moral codes or sonic other modes of behaviour.The issue is on the personal

level and answers the questions:" What is suitable t'or me "," what matters do

I accept or reject "." what feels strange to me? " It is difficult to think thatbinary "logic" takes place in other directions than the personality of a human.

1 2

10

As a matter of fact, self-identification can be considered evaluation-based

decision making on the personal level. On the behavioral level there is no need

for complex evaluations because the pacing of bounds should be active.Thustwo alternatives are enough for making appropriate decisions when interactingwith social environment.

4. Self-identification and social environment

As was previously mentioned a human system is a dynamic open onewhich interacts with the social environment. Niskanen differentiates four cases

of personality changes: I ) changes during life 2) changes in relation to otherpeople 3) society originated changes 4) changes connected with universe{ 1990

pp. 36-37).The dynamics dealt with .can be considered to belong to the second

point in this context since the question is about dynamic relations with socialenv ironment.

Dyad is the smallest element of social environment which can function

as social environment. One person is an environment to another.

Dyad can be examined from many viewpoints such as roles, dominance.

status and norms.They have their advantages but there is not much use forthem in this context!' can be assumed that self-identification is a "dialogue"

between two binary decision systems in dyad where both are pacing bounds in

mutual interaction. Personality as such is often defined as being the smallestclement in the social systems but the greatest one in an individual system.The

issues somewhat change when we move into a social system.a small group.

This might make one think that when we transfer to a small group self-

identification would he without significance because other modes of behaviour

seem to he more important. such as norms, role differentiation, affectivestructure and status nets.The issue, however, may be theother way aroundbecause there may emerge an emphasis of binary decision-making due to the

maintaining other types of behaviours to be in line with one's own

13

11

personality.That is why it is necessary to pace the bounds in order to be

adaptive but not conformablelt is natural to think that there is a continuous

"reading" of the boundaries during which certain distinctive marks are readaccording to which identification is verified.This in turn determines other

behaviour, such as getting involved in group situations and participating injoint activities.

In the case of collective as a social environment it is seen that self-identification fades because in collective behaviour there is contaggion ofbehaviour, such as emotions, formation of common goal and assimilation in the

crowd. It is assumed that the binary pacing the bounds occasionally does not

function because of the suggestive impact of the collective.Thus binarydecisions are not made except by some individual deviations which are capble

of resisting the social pressure.

In this context organisation does not refer to order but it is understood

in the usual meaning as a large entity with role positions and tasks joiningthem. One of the features of a large organisation is the impersonal relations

prevailing within it. such as in big firms and government offices.Thus it can be

presumed that binary decision making is emphasised due to the impersonalsettings.This may take place for instance an attempt to change theenvironmental conditions to correspond more with one's personal likings.Thus

binary-decision making is stronger in an organisation.

Aggregate is usually interpreted as a collection of individuals with weak

connections. Aggregate as such does not presume any specific conditions ofbehaviour, for example people gathered at marketplace where everybody is

an individual. From the viewpoint of binary decision-making there is no need

for continuous decisions and it is probable that the binaring is on the base level.

In short, self-identification is acceptance-rejection behaviour which isassumed to take place according to one's personality.The function of binary

decision behaviour was examined in the subenvironments and variability was

taken into account, according to the circumstances existing in the

1 4

12

subenvironments.The dynamism of acceptance-rejection behaviour has

not yet been dealt with but it will he given in the form of a hypothesis.

5. Work hypothesis

In this context dynamism consists of actions in subenvironments. It is

consistent to think that functions which are based on the frame of personality

have tolerances. On the other hand, it is not likely that people behave in the

same way in the dyad as in an organisation.Thus changes can he assumed over

the subenvironments.The diachronic or structural changes are not hypothesised

because a change in the personality structure has very deep influences onbehaviour. As a matter of fact, dynamism can be defined as a continuousfunctional change-sequence through the subenvironmentsin the

aforementioned journey through the subenvironments it was assumed that the

binary decision process functions according to one's personality.

In the dvad the relation was considered a "dialogue", in the small group

continuous "reading". in the collective there was no pacine the boundscontrol.in the organisation aecentuated binary decision-making. in aggregate

the base level.

The matter is not as straightforward as supposed because the decision-

making has to be visible in overt behaviour. Anyway, it is useful to have sound

hypotheses but their corroboration or falsification is another matter. It is

necessary to to say somethine about the verification of the dynamism in overt

behaviour.The crucial question is how ale pacing the hounds based on thebinary decisions perceived in behaviour' When a person makes decisionshe/she also performs selections, so that the most probable alternative for the

verification is preferential behaviour in relation to an actual subenvironment.

It is chok.e behavior which may be the most revealing. Evidently dynamism

:an he perceived through environmental situations which act as stimuliconfigurations to which a person responds with preferring. Thus pacing the

15

13

bounds according to one's personality can be inferred through thepreferences a person makes in purposeful walks in a social environment. In a

social environment people confront varying situations with which they must

cope with, selectively. Selection presumes decision-making and somealternatives are considered better than others.

In short, the self-identification of personality can be seen as an openpreferential binary decision system.The dynamism of pacing the bounds can be

verfied according to preferential variety in the subenvironments.Howpreferences vary is a crucial question in relation to dynamism on thebehavioural level. As in many cases behaviour is conditional and it is

implemented in certain conditions which are sometimes known, sometimes not.

If we assume personality is given then we can hypothesise that dynamismvaries in one's social environment as follows: in the dyad the prefereplial

behaviour goes according to one's personality.in ibe small group preferencesbecome ainbivalent.in the collective behaviour transfers to environmentalpreferences.in the organisation there iLoverpreferring. and in the aggregate

peening is the same as alone,

6. Measuring self-identification of personality'

One or the shortcomings in behavioural measurement is the lack olquantities. To put it frankly, we do not have SI-standards in behaviour. Usually

we say we measure attributes as though they were permanent and tanyiNc. As a

matter of fact, we measure processes which seem to be "frozen" tor a

while.The basic concept in the living world is continuous change with different

time resolution levels. An issue which has not received much attention is a

spontaneous emergence of a response.This means a response which comes

about in the very measurement situation. How do we differentiate between the

spontaneous msponse sequences and the ones which we are to measure"! A

14

comparison point can be people's experience repertoire from which atouch for reality can be obtained. If people have experiences about events then

we can conclude that there is another chain of events than the one originatingin the measuring situation. It is not a mere rumor that brains have certainplasticity and they can produce spontaneous responses.

In principle it is not useful to have imaginative results unless the question

is about imagination.There are also other shortcomings in behaviouralmeasurement but the above one has not been discussed according to myknowledge. However, verbose discussion is not a fertile viewpoint forpromoting research.That is why it is good to move onto the construction of the

measures for structure, function and dynamism.

6.1 Structure measure

Constructing a useful measure for personality structure would takelifetime.That is why it is fair to adapt an existing one from Eysenck. TheEysenck Personality Inventory ( Eysenck 1956) was translated into Finnish and

studied the qualities of EPI with factor analysis by Konttinen(1968).Theprocedure for making the structure measure took place in such a way that, only

those items which had the highest structure coefficients in extroversion andneuroticism were included in the structure measure. After that the opposites

for the describing terms were obtained and the questionnaire was puttogether( Appendix ).

6.2 Function and dynamism measure

In this context function and verbing are considered equivalent. Theformerly constructed subenvironmental sequence will be measured with a

17

15

test.The basic idea is that function and dynamism can be measured byusing a verbrepertoire from which people select the verbs which best describe

the situation they see in the characters with speech ball000ns (Appendix 2). The

verbrepertoire is called a verb-box from which the subjects select and form the

number of yeti's indicated below as they wish. Above the balloons there are the

names of subenvironments and the order follows the one presented earlier.This

time the terms are more realistic than the mere theoretical tenns.The verb-box

includes the verbs which have been derived from the structure measure inorder to see whether identification follows the lines indicated by thestructure.in other words.the subjects construct the entire sequence which formsdynamism.

6.3 Obtaining background information

In order to avoid mere imaginative behaviour we need informationabout whether people have been in the subenvironments.That is why aquestionnaire for background information was compiled (Appendix 3).There is

a question for every subenvironment in the questionnaire.

The family represents the small group.The classification of enterprises

is for the organiation. Going to see a football or ice-hockey match is for the

collective. Socialising with work-mates and friends after working hours is for

the small group because everybody does not have a family. The last item is forthe dyad.

in this way we shall obtain information if people behave in thesubenvironments or if they have experiences about the object matters underscrutiny. If people are included who do not have experiences in the varioussocial groupings, then due to the experienced persons the identification can beverified more clearly by using experienced people as a reference point.

In short, a personality structure measure was compiled on the basis ofthe EPI questionnaire. A verbing test was made for the function and

1 8

16

dynamism. A background measure was constructed for inquiringwhether people have experience and they have behaved in the subenvironments.

If not then verification of the identification will become easier.

7. Possible educational im plications

The subject under scrutiny deals with educating social skills. It would not

be surprising if the results indicated that binary decision-making is rigid.

Depending on what kind of results will be obtained it is possible to try toimplement means education for improving coping with social environment, if

necessary. Flexibility is not a drawback in relation to socialenvironment.Broadening social skills. e.g. through simulated activitiesimproves the ability to cope with one's social environment and simultaneously

may make one's personality more versatile and produce more realistical

binary decision-making which will increase behavioural quality.

Dkc 11%11011

The purpose of the paper was to apply the Systems Approach topersonality as an educational phenomenon. In addition, the precise formulation

of the problem under scrutiny and the making preliminary measures for thehypothesis for reality were applied. What the processual practices will be is a

matter for future.

19

uppoupwingneummi

17

References

Ackoff,R.L.Emery,F.E. 1972 QpPalrpstiefuLLyggina. London:Tavistock Publications.

Eysenvk,H.J. 1956 " The Questionnaire Measurement of Neuroticism

and Extraversion". Bevista 4i Psycologia, 50.

Konttinen,R. 1968 EPI-loamakkeen( Eysenck Personality Inventorylpomennoksen faktorirakenneiyviiskyltin Yliopisto.Psykologian laitos,N:o 77.

Laasonen,R.L. 1991 Modeling System Operators Affecting theInformation Organizer of an Individual. Department of Education,Universityof Helsinki:Research Bulletin 77.

Niskanen.E.A. 1990 Personality as an Educational Phenomenon.

Depatment of Education,University of Helsinki:Research Bulletin 75.

20

18

Vastataan kysymykseen kukin omalta kohdaltaan "Millainen ihminenolen" ympyröimällã rasti kustakin vaihtoehto parista.

1.

2.

hermostuvarauhallineneriarvoinensamanarvoinen x muiden kanssa

3. hyvintuulinen x

pahantuulinen x4. masentuva

tasainen5. haluava

hal uton6, väsyvä

jaksava7. innostuva

kyllastyvä8. vaivautuva

vaivaantumaton x9. vapautunut

sulkeutunut10. vilkas

tyyni11. eloisa

hillitty12. sanavalmis

tuppisuinen13. sosiaalinen

veWyvii14. sukkelapuheinen x

harrapuheinen x15. hauska

ikav5

21

xananison

2 %non lb

Rylwro4

3 yerDia

I omarn no)eif OS I Mill

0 0 0

(5 vortil

'2 2

Irmo s jOik+011Se

4 vorg

VertAaarrkko

olaherrnostuttaa

tuoptsuinenjaksaaputlua sukkelaantehda hyvantuubseksivawaantuaot on tasatnen(Ala sostaahnenrauhoft taatehda sarnanarvoiseksiofia hauskaasulkeutuao elotsa

16(464 rinnsos.

S vecbtel

innostaa()Ph AvAAvilkpicrifr t88dia tyytifpuhua harvak seer.tehda enarvolsel sitialut aoa hatut onIryttristvttastehda DahantuuGseksi

sana v aimsmasentaavasyttaavetayrya

20

Nainen Mies

Perheenne jasenten Iukumaiira

Oktte tai oktte ollut a) pienyrityksessa(3-10 ihmista)

h) keskisuuressa yrityksessa( 15-50 ihmista)

c) suuryrityksessa(y1i 100 ihmistii)

d) ammattijarjestossa

e)

jokin muu,mika

Seuraaneko urheilua paikan paalla esim. jalkapanokiaakiekkoa

a) kylla x h) en x

Oletteko tekemisissa työkavereinenne kanssa tyOaJan ulkopuolella

a) kylla x h) en x

Monenko ihtnisen kanssa

Käyuekii ulkona ystävienne kanssa

a) en x h) kyllä

Monenko itunisen kanssa

Vietattekö Elation aikaaa tyttiVpoikaystavanne kanssa

a) kylla x h) en

23

allo. 53 The Electronic Hand Catailater in Finnish Comprehensive School MathematicsTeaching by JOHANNES PAASONEN. Oct., 1980. 50 pp

Mo. 54 Learning Process in Terms of S4fts and Strategies: Theoretical Background andPilot Study by ANNA-LIISA LEIto Otte.. 1980. 40 pp.

sNo. 55 EmotiOn and Cognition in Visual An Education by INKERI SAVA. March, 1981 48 pp

No. 56 Classroom Analysis: Concepts. Findings. Applications. CPA Helsinki InvestigationsIII edited by ERKKI KOMULAINEN and PERTT1 KANSANEN. May 1981 52 pp.

kNo 57 Psychometric Test Theory and Cognitive Processes. A Theoretical Scrutiny andEmpirical Research by JARKKO LEINO. October 1981, 74 pp.

No 58 On the Dynamics of Undergraduate Performance and Dropout by KAJ MALY April,1982. 14 pp.

xleo 59 Learning Process in Terms of Styles and Strategies: Case Studies by ANNA-LIISALEINO May, 1982. 51 pp.

No 60 Research Protect on Educational Aims by ERKK1 A NISKANEN & al June. 1982105 pp

No 61 Admission to Teacher Education and Two Cognitive Styles by ANNA-LIISA LEINOARJA PUURULA. June. 1983 54 Pp

No 62 The Helsinki Test The Inkblots and Using the Test by KARL BRUHN October, 198449 pp

No 63 Realization of Didactic Principles in Foreign Language Teaching in Soviet Schoolsby LYYL1RONKONEN November, 1984 30 pp

No 64 An Exploration of the Interpersonal Relationships, Health-Related Behavior andPhysical and Mental Health of Finnisn University Students by Vello Sermat October,1966 29 IV

No 65 The Meaning of Life among Secondary School Pupils A Theoretical Framework andSoma initial Results by HANNELE NIEM1 January. 1987 81 pp

No 68 Some Principal Results of the Studies Carried out in the Research Project oninstructional Material by VESA A NISKANEN. October, 1987 27 pp

No 67 Assessing Foreign Language Training Needs of Adults A case study from Finland byKAARINA YL1-RENKO April. 1988 90 pp

xNo 68 Knowledge in Interactive Practice Disciplines An analysis of knowledge in educati-on and health care by ANNELI SARVIMAKI October, 19613 276 pp

xNo 69 Intercultural Communication as an Aim of English Language Teaching by KAAR1NAYLI-RENKO December, 1988 45 PP

xNo 70 Integrating Information in Conceptual Models Use of an information structure .nbuilding conceptual models for behavioural studies by SEPPO KONTIAINENJanuary 1989 59 pp

No 71 Theoretical Background and Development of Instructional Materials by JARKKOLEINO April 1989 25 PP

No 72 A Study of Learning Styles by ANNA-LIISA LEINO JARKKO LEINO and JUHA PL1NDSTEDT August 1: 0: 68 pp

No 73 Nonverbal Intelligence and Foreign Language Learning by iRENF KRISTIANSENMay 1990 184 PP

No 74 Pluralism and Education in Values by TAPIO PUOLIMATKA October 1990 31 pp

No 75 Personality as an Educational PhenOrnenOn by ERKKI A NISKANEN October 199044 OP.

No 76 Describing Personality Utilizing the Theory of Fuzzy Systems try VESA A N1SKA-NEN October 1990 16 pp

No 77 Modeling System Operators Affecting the Information Organizer of an Individual byRAIMO LAASONEN, May 1991 104 pp.

No. 78 Use of Conceptual Models in Case Studies, Dynamic Concept Analysis by SEPPOKONT1AINEN Applications in collaboration with Klaus Helkama. Peter HerriotJohn Hobrough, Jyri Manninen, John Roscoe and Matcolm Tight June 1991 237

No 79 Dynamic Knowledge in School. An Action Research on Instructional Developmentwith the Aid of Microcomputers by JARKKO LEINO. December 1991. 118 pp

No 80 Self-Identification of Personality in Social Environment by RAIMO LAASONENDecember 1991. 20 pp

it) Out Of pnnt.

,4

I$BN 951-45-5992-4ISSN 0359-5749

Helsinki 1992Ylioplstopaino